Sunday, September 10, 2006

WTC 7 was severely damaged on the south side of the building and was on fire for about 7 hours

See Video: On 9/11, WTC1 Hit WTC7, Seriously Damaging the South SideAt 10:29 a.m., WTC 1 (the north tower) collapsed and contrary to the claims of 9/11 conspiracy people, it did not collapse into its footprint like a controlled explosion. (See the diagram) Instead, as the building collapsed, the debris from WTC 1 spilled into the surrounding streets and onto WTC 7 among others, damaging the building. (See the diagram to the left showing the debris in black which extended north beyond WTC 6).

Eyewitness accounts from firemen such as Captain Chris Boyle and Deputy Chief Peter Hayden and photographic evidence back this up. It is the south side of WTC 7 that was damaged and it is likely that the fires (see figures 5-16 and 5-17) started as a result of debris from the collapse of WTC 1, the fires in WTC 7 started at approximately the same time as the collapse of WTC 1 and it is the fires that are primarily the reason the WTC 7 building collapsed. Most 9/11 conspiracy people only show you the east side and north side of the WTC 7.

Boyle: ... on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all,
but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good.

... Then we received an order from Fellini, we're going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn't look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn't really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I'm standing next to said, that building doesn't look straight. So I'm standing there. I'm looking at the building. It didn't look right, but, well, we'll go in, we'll see.

So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody's going into 7, there's creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.

Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

Boyle:There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we'll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyle.html

The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create
a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC Building 7].A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the
building.The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity
was in serious doubt.http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-634

Another fireman reported damage that progressed as the day wore on.

Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
Division 1 - 33 years

Hayden: ... also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse.Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o'clock in the afternoon we realized
this thing was going to collapse.

Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?

Hayden: No, not right away, and that's probably why it stood for so long because it took awhile for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn't make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling thepeople back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.

Firehouse: Chief Nigro said they made a collapse zone and wanted everybody away from number 7 - did you have to get all of those people out?

Hayden: Yeah, we had to pull everybody back. It was very difficult. We had to be very forceful in getting the guys out. They didn't want to come out. There were guys going into areas that I wasn't even really comfortable with, because of the possibility of secondary collapses. We didn't know how stable any of this area was. We pulled everybody back probably by 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon. We said, this building is going to come down, get back. It came down about 5 o'clock or so, but we had everybody backed away by then.
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html

Most 9/11 conspiracy people only show you the east side and north side of WTC 7 but it is the south side of the building that was damaged by the debris from WTC 1 and it is the west side of the building where the smoke was pouring out of. (see figures 5-16 and 5-17)

More eyewitness accounts from firemen and photographic evidence (Reports from the scene mention the damage):
Deputy Chief Nick ViscontiDivision 14 - 34 years

Visconti:So now I was in contact with Jay. I found out what kind of shape he was in and I kept getting reports back from people that we're not there yet, we're working our way, there's a collapsed area in 6. I'm standing not too far from Frank Fellini. He says, Nick, I'm really worried about this building. We were all worried because there was a lot of fire in it and we were concerned about the building collapsing. We weren't sure that it was stable enough that it wasn't going to collapse.

Firehouse:Which building was that?

Visconti: Building 6. So I had put a battalion chief with each of the groups that went into 6. I kept trying to talk to him, walking over there, walking down a little bit into the ramp they went down, the door they went down into and how are you doing? You know we're trying, we can't find it. I don't know how long this was going on, but I remember standing there looking over at building 7 and realizing that a big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side. I looked up at the building and I saw smoke in it, but I really didn't see any fire at that time. ...

Now, World Trade Center 7 was burning and I was thinking to myself, how come they're not trying to put this fire out? I didn't realize how much they had because my view was obstructed. All I could see was the upper floor. At some point, Frank Fellini said, nowwe've got hundreds of guys out there, hundreds and hundreds, and that's on the West Street side alone. He said to me, Nick, you've got to get those people out of there. I thought to myself, out of where? Frank, what do you want, Chief? He answered, 7 World Trade Center, imminent collapse, we've got to get those people out of there. I walked out and I got to Vesey and West, where I reported to Frank. He said, we're moving the command post over this way, that building's coming down.

At this point, the fire was going virtually on every floor, heavy
fire and smoke that really wasn't bothering us when we were searching
because it was being pushed southeast and we were a little bit west
of that. I remember standing just where West and Vesey start to rise toward the entrance we were using in the World Financial Center. There were a couple of guys standing with me and a couple of guys right at the intersection, and we were trying to back them up and here goes 7. It started to come down and now people were starting to run.http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/visconti.html

Griffin writes, "in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual. Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend. But as videos of the towers show, there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes." But contrary to what Griffin claims, there were indeed signs of bending or sagging. Witnesses reported it and photos document it. Griffin is simply wrong.

26 comments:

I have always maintained that the 911 disaster was higghly if not completely engineered by Israel and those who support Israel. HOWEVER, you information is not totally accurate either...than the public media's rendition is wrong too.I suggest you watch the video made by Loose Change and found on Google Video and also on YouTube. This is to date, the best investigative video and was also aired (segments of it) on CBC's recent expose of this demolition. I have watched several demolitions in my 49 years of life and this was most definitely a DEMOLITION.

Who cares if there were fires, fires cant pulverise giant steel beams and make a building collapse in 10 seconds into a neat. We've already established it was a controlled demolition. You are a liar and not an expert on anything, please go away.

Have you really even given much credence to the alternative arguments? I mean most of the counter-evidence I've seen of yours comes from NIST. If you really want to make some gain in this debate...

Prove that Griffin and the others are wrong about NIST, the 9/11 Commission and Fema. Reaffirm the credibility of those organizations against charges made by supporters of the alternative theory or else evidence derived from them will only continue to spin this carousel.

For anybody that is interested I've got well over 12 hours worth of documentaries about 9/11, several of which illustrate the complete LACK OF INTEREST on the part of these official institutions in conducting a GENUINE investigation based on sound evidence.

Do not forget that all three answer to the Bush administration, which has already come under lawsuit by much of the scientific community under charges of skewing science and data in other fields not related to 9/11 for the purpose of furthering its partisan agenda.

Funny, but I thought that Larry Silverstein had already cleared up the Building 7 issue when he told a PBS interviewer that "they made the decision to pull it."

Are you folks really saying that the man in charge of the WTC complex is lying? What would be his motivation?

Furthermore, how does a hole on one side of the building cause a classic demolition "crimp" in the center of the building and cause the structure to fall in upon itself, both sides leaning into the center?

And why did the BBC report that WTC7 had collapsed twenty some minutes prior to it happening, with a video of the still-standing building prominently displayed behind the commentator explaining its collapse, only to be cut off by a suspicious "signal loss" about five minutes before the event took place?

I stand behind your position that US support of Israel is an unhealthy and disastrous policy, but helping the US government get away with this inside job (as well as the destruction of evidence on ENRON and many other SEC violation cases housed in that very building, WTC 7) is hardly the way to win support from thinking Americans.

I have to say I have seen just about all of the video relating to the attacks on 9-11 and you say they knew the buildings were going to collapse because of the structural fatigue yet you don't mention the fact or even offer any evidence to explain why floors well below the damage in WTC1 or WTC2 were converted into dust, they were untouched by fire of jet fuel and the sections of the building that were damaged were separated by three foot thick slabs of concrete on the elevator bank floors. Which would mean that the upper part of the building would have been the only part of the building touched. With respect to WTC7, you say that it didn't stay in it's own foot print, you are right, but even controlled demolitions do not completely contain all of the debris from the demolition. Also you fail to mention the numerous video clips where explosions can clearly be heard moments prior to the collapse. Or wait what about the scientific data that has been thoroughly researched and peer reviewed finding thermite in the debris. You do bring up many valid points and observations but you offer no explanations to back up your theories. I also have met and know many of the firefighters who survived 9-11. Many of them heard numerous explosions prior to each of the collapses. When I say explosions I don't mean the sound of steel beams popping, which are very loud by them selves. But I mean the ones that were caught by seismographs in the area prior to the collapses. Also how do you explain the 1800 degree temperatures under the rubble weeks after the towers collapse? Molten metal, and numerous eye witness's that heard and felt explosions throughout the buildings. Now to touch on who could or would have something to do with this, well I have reason to believe that it was our own government that orchestrated and made sure it could be carried out, but, I do believe that members of the sayeret matkal, were involved because of the fact that on two of the four flights I was able to find "former" members of the group were listed as passengers. But remember, being Israeli does not mean you necessarily mean you support the governments actions or goals, same as citizens here. The acts of September 11 helped only two countries completely, Israel, and the USA. Do your research and you will find the link and the specific people involved who have an agenda that is being filled.

The problem is this: there's so many information out there that show 9/11 may not be as simple as a terrorist attack. In fact, it's quite ridiculous to believe your country cannot protect itself from a few rogue airliners flown by amateur hijackers, and at the same time squarely put the blame on terrorists who planned this mission from half way across the globe.

photos by such emerging in this blog is that I love the news, they always capture the best images so that later we have the pleasure of seeing them on sites like this! The post is great. poor people that had to go through this tragedy!